User talk:Will-Castriotis

I never said it did. I won't revert again if you don't re-insert "FYROM" as if it was the country's name, which it isn't. I am very sick of the Macedonia question, which I have argued here with Greek about 50 times, but if you become a registered user I am happy to debate it with you again. I don't debate anons. Efharisto. Adam 13:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- I have registered even though I was under the impression that anyone can edit an article, having an account or not. I have to say that currently I am using a public workstation (in an academic institution) which can and will be used by a number of other users, so please do not assume that every edit coming from the current or similar IPs, is mine.

To the issue at hand now: 1) You never said it did (i.e. Greece opposed to an independent ...) but still you were quick to revert the whole thing despite my pointer. Anyway, I’ve seen that you have accepted my phrasing, now.

2) 'former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia' is one of the legal names of the republic; there is no legal or other dispute on that. It is, also a self-identifying term and for example it was recently (2003) used by the republic itself for its application to the WTO. Nothing to do with “[...] ruled by the UN or the EU".

3) You are inserting "Macedonia" (not even "Republic of Macedonia") which certainly is not a legal name, yet you object to the use of the acronym "FYROM." I acknowledge that "FYROM” ‘‘maybe’’ is not a legal name, opposed to the "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (which certainly is) but still there are strong issues with the current wording. A good example is that:

“Greek foreign policy strongly supports Macedonia's integration into NATO and the European Union, [...]"

Greek foreign policy certainly does not "strongly" support "Macedonia's", or "Republic of Macedonia's" integration into NATO and the EU but rather the "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia's" integration for the _time being_, stating that a commonly accepted solution for the name dispute must be reached. EU, NATO or any other organisation does not recognise "Republic of Macedonia."

Filikoys Chairetismoys --Will-Castriotis

I'm not sure I follow why you aren't editing under your registered name, but that's your prerogative. You will get more consideration from me and other editors if you do.
"Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" is not the country's legal name. Countries can only have one legal name, and that is the name used in its constitution. The legal constitutional name of the country is Republic of Macedonia.
FYROM is a name which the country is called by the UN, the EU and other countries as a result of Greek blackmail and obstructionism in the early 1990s, largely because of Greek domestic politics - the competitive national chauvinism of Papandreou and Mitsotakis, as I'm sure you recall. Macedonia has accepted this situation in order to gain admission to the UN, get EU aid etc. But that doesn't alter the fact that its only legal name is Republic of Macedonia.
Wikipedia is not bound by what the UN, the EU or anyone else choose to call Macedonia, nor are the national sensibilities of Greece or Greeks a relevant consideration. As an encyclopaedia our job is to tell the truth and call things by their correct names. Adam 14:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to changing "Macedonia" to "Republic of Macedonia" throughout. Adam 14:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't want yet another revert war over this tiresome subject, especially at this time of night (0046 here in Afstralia), but if you want one you will get one, and I usually win them. Adam 14:46, 4 August 200

I didn't have a registered account up until today. Anyway, with or without an account I am not here to ‘reek havoc' on any article, no matter how "controversial" (I never liked this word really) the subject is.
"former (usually not capital F) Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" is certainly a legal name. The republic uses it in all international organisations of a political nature (e.g. EU, UN), of an economic nature (e.g. WTO, World Bank), military nature as NATO, sporting nature as IOC etc. Are you saying that all its applications were made under a "non-legal" name?
Not true; the constitutional name is not the only legal name a country may have. A good example of that is the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland." I am sure you know that UK does not have a constitution.
You are calling the Greek policies of the past (between 1992 and 1995?) on the matter as a "competitive national chauvinism, blackmail, obstructionism" forwarding it at the same time as an argument about the non-legality of the name "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia?” Well I fail to see the connection. On a side note I do not agree at all with that over-simplistic, POVish, extereme analysis.
If you want to talk about policies, actions and reactions in general that can, may or did affect the naming issue then we must also look at FYROM/ROM's side. You may also recall the constitutional issue (which was solved by the 1995 interim accord), the assassination attempt on the life of the 1st president of the republic (K. Gligorov, who was the one that made the deal), the "competitive national chauvinism" of various ethic groups within the republic itself regarding: naming conventions, language , political autonomy etc, most notably the crisis during the Kosovar War and the 2001 civil war between FYROM/ROM citizens [albeit ethnic Macedonians (Slav) and ethic Albanians]. US government (G.W.Bush administration) used these internal issues a couple of days before the 7th November 2004 ROM/FYROM referendum as an official reason for recognising the state as ROM.
I never said that UN, EU, US or anyone else policies should dictate the naming conventions in an independent encyclopaedia. The "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" designation, especially inside some contexts, is perfectly accurate, in use and therefore "true." If the "national sensibilities of Greeks" are not a relevant consideration regarding the "Macedonia" designation in general, then the national sensibilities of ethnic Macedonians (Slav) are also not a relevant consideration regarding the "former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia/FYROM" designation.

I should log-off too; I am the only one in the lab’s office right now (UK, Friday 6:20pm here). I haven’t started any edit war so please don't threat me with silly actions. I can understand that you may be a senior, highly regarded member of this community / project but please try to keep the discussion relevant, civilised and calm. Goodnight. :-) -- Will-Castriotis

I am not quite sure why I was blocked. Is it because I had a disagreement with the user Adam Carr?

What's the block message you're getting, please? --Pilotguy^{(roger that)} 18:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get a message here but I think it has to do with my IP, my registration shortly after I made some "anonymoys" contributions and a 3RR rule (I was told by user Adam Carr that it's better to have an account here). The message is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:157.228.118.106. That is my current IP address with which I have made some edits in the article "Foreign Relations of Greece." I am reading right now all about 3RR rule but so far I fail to see why I was in breach of the rule. -- Will-Castriotis

Here are the edits in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/157.228.118.106 Please consider only the edits made today (4 August 2006). Every major edit that I have made was explained in the summary box and in the talk pages. On the other hand I have not reverted blindly more than 3 times; I have made textual (and contextual) changes in order to better the article and analyse the subject with more care. I thought I was in a discussion with Adam when I saw the blocking message by user William M. Connolley --Will

Things are getting more confusing. There is also a third (or fourth user counting William M. Connolley) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Porfyrios who apparently joined the discussion. --Will

Block/autoblock

We can't unblock you at this time, because you haven't given us the information we need to even look into your block. You yourself were not blocked; if you were prevented from editing, you must have been autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address. I'm removing your unblock request because there's nothing we can do without this information. If you still want to be unblocked, feel free to add the {{unblock}} tag back to this page, and be sure to include the message you saw when you tried to edit, including the IP address. This is what the message looks like. Without that information, we can't help you. ➨ ЯEDVERS 19:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Will-Castriotis (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Elsewhere on page

Decline reason:

Per your comment above, about blidndly reverting, WP:3RR is not exclusively about blindly reverting, please reread it, it is about stopping the disruption caused by edit warring and getting disputes concerning content resolved in a constructive way.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I am sorry for messing things up. Here is the message that I am getting:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by William M. Connolley for the following reason (see our blocking policy): 3rr on Foreign relations of Greece

Your IP address is 157.228.118.106.

--Will Castriotis

I just saw that user Adam Carr is also blocked and certainly that was not my intention. Unfortunately, I do have to log-off right now so hopefully the situation will be resolved by tomorrow. It’s a pity that the discussion (difference of opinions) escalated into this but quite frankly I find the whole situation a bit silly. Thank you all for your efforts. – Will Castriotis

Policy on Macedonia

Now that we are unblocked, I can respond to your comments above. I wish I had known that it was actually Wikipedia policy that "the name Republic of Macedonia be used per Wikipedia:Naming conflict as the state's official self-identifying name," when I first debated this with you, it would have saved a lot of time. Most of what you say above is based on a confusion between a name that is used as a diplomatic convenience (FYROM) and the country's actual name, its "official self-identifying name", which is the name in its constitution. That is the name which Wikipedia uses. I trust you will now accept this. Adam 06:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]